How MYTHIC are your bad guys?

[Zelda Themelin]

I guess I was more looking for answers to the question of WHY your bad guys are scary.

Symbols are part of it, but not IMO the most important thing. Scary is personal thing, every person has his/her own associations with experiences, dreams, creepy horror-movies and stuff like that.

But when speaking about bad guys in rpg, it is always their power, and enemity, that is scary, not little details. Villains without noticable power levels aren't really worth being scared of.

'Symbolic' badness invokes animosity and dislike, rather than fear. When combined with certain alieness with power however, makes the 'trick' for most people. Power can also be social, but in rpg that is hard to potray beliavable when those npc:s are played by dm 'Joe/Jane the Avarage' which IMO most people are.

It helps however create persons that are somehow clearly defined. Too much 'grey' personality areas, and confused reactions follow. Peole start looking 'ways to pay themselves out without fight' so to say. With truly scary bad guys people shouldn't be able to logic themselves out this or other way.

Yep, its all about power, really.

Well, that's part of it.

(deleted to put sentence into right place, and removed some pointless content).

 

[rounser]

Also on the topic of villains, I think it's important to portray them as effectual - a decent, perhaps even overwhelming adversary for PCs.

There is a tendency in RPGs to present a plot, have the PCs foil it, rince and repeat. The FR setting suffered from this a fair bit because of the ethics rules whereby evil could never triumph.

Perhaps setting up scenarios where the PCs will find themselves taking one step forward, but the villain pushes things two steps back elsewhere (the PCs may save this town, but two others were lost while they were busy there) - and only some exceedingly fancy footwork on the PC's parts will change this.

It is quite possible to run a very dark campaign in a setting such as FR. Douglas Nile's Darkwalker trilogy is a good example of this - the minions of Kazgaroth seem unstoppable as they rack up victories and make inroads - even being insidious enough to successfully destroy the romance of the protagonists through a deliberate seduction. Keep the level of hope and triumph low and against the odds, and you give the PCs a darn good shot at heroism.

And mythic villains need a good shot of mythic heroism to truly oppose them, right?

 

[barsoomcore]

Symbols are part of it, but not IMO the most important thing. Scary is personal thing, every person has his/her own associations with experiences, dreams, creepy horror-movies and stuff like that.

True enough, but myths exist for a reason -- because they speak with truth to many people. Vampires are a powerful metaphor that has existed for centuries because they hit buttons way in the back of our brain -- for almost all of us. Of course everyone has their own personal freak-outs, but if there weren't these symbols that touched all of us, horror movies wouldn't exist.

But when speaking about bad guys in rpg, it is always their power, and enemity, that is scary, not little details. Villains without noticable power levels aren't really worth being scared of.

Well, of course a bad guy has to be able to do bad things. But just saying, "You have walked into the room and there is a 20th level wizard ancient red dragon in front of you," isn't going to scare anyone. They may think, "Well, there goes my character," but there's not going to be any fear without some context. Without those "little details" you mention, it's just math. The whole point of playing rpg's is to be able to provide an imaginary experience. Every "little detail" a DM provides makes the game more engrossing and powerful for the players.

Rich, believable characters who evoke emotional responses from the players are a part of that whole process. And when that character is supposed to induce fear in the players, I believe that characters who represent mythic horrors we all share make for effectively scary characters. It works in movies and novels, why wouldn't it work in games?

And to address your comments on how power is what matters -- power is PART of the symbolic component. A vampire (to return to one of the classic archetypes) is powerful -- that's part of its nature. It's powerful BECAUSE of what it has sacrificed -- because of its mythic nature.

Power can also be social, but in rpg that is hard to potray beliavable when those npc:s are played by dm 'Joe/Jane the Avarage' which IMO most people are.

Not sure what you're getting at here. If you're saying that most DMs cannot play characters who have massive personal impact, who command attention and respect and strike awe into the players by their sheer presence, all I can say is: I can. And I have known other DMs who could. That's a question of superior DMing, not NPC design.

(formatting edit)

 

[Zelda Themelin]

Not sure what you're getting at here. If you're saying that most DMs cannot play characters who have massive personal impact, who command attention and respect and strike awe into the players by their sheer presence, all I can say is: I can. And I have known other DMs who could. That's a question of superior DMing, not NPC design.

Neither was my meaning, though both can be true. I meant, that people IRL aren't social shapeshifters. It is hard to potray somebody's elses (and imaginative person's at that) social power, if that's all the 'magic' there is. DM can impress people, that's not the same thing.

Good DMing I think has a lot too do with people's tastes. Some have thought I am good dm, and I know how greatly I suck at DMing.

Yep, true to rest what you said. Though IMO movies and books can be effective in causing emotions in ways rpg can not, and vice verse.

What comes to your red dragon example, lack of description has nothing to do with lack of metaphors. And of course villain with personality and prior personal involtment into character's life has more emotional impact than 'end of level monster without introduction'.

What comes to myths and symbols, some have been overused so much they actually make some people go 'yawn, I don't care' and have quite the non-impressive effect when used, especially that mentioned vampire-thing happens to one of those.

 

[barsoomcore]

It is hard to potray somebody's elses (and imaginative person's at that) social power, if that's all the 'magic' there is. DM can impress people, that's not the same thing.

I guess I don't really understand what you mean by "social power". Can you explain that more clearly?

Good DMing I think has a lot too do with people's tastes. Some have thought I am good dm, and I know how greatly I suck at DMing.

Yeah, but we don't. We all think you're great! Heh.

IMO movies and books can be effective in causing emotions in ways rpg can not.

I guess I'm always trying as a DM to really stir up emotions in my players. I want to SCARE them, to EXCITE them, to make them angry, whatever.

What comes to myths and symbols, some have been overused so much they actually make some people go 'yawn, I don't care' and have quite the non-impressive effect when used, especially that mentioned vampire-thing happens to one of those.

My thought on that problem -- that symbols get overused and thus lose their impact -- is that it comes from bad writing. Or DMing, whatever. The symbols, the archetypes, are ALWAYS scary. They ARE the things that scare us. If they're poorly delivered then we aren't affected and we say, "Oh, vampires aren't scary," and then BOOM! something like Alien (which can, on several levels, be seen as a vampire story, not the least of which is the sexual subtext) shows up and blows audiences away.

I agree that STARTING from archetypes and building your NPCs around them is a bad way to go -- you're very likely to end with really cartoony bad guys who are SUPPOSED to be scary but aren't. I was just observing that the bad guys in my campaign, which have been very effective at scaring my players (they get really freaked out -- it's very gratifying), all relate to mythic tropes that permeate our culture and history. I didn't plan it that way, but I don't think it's a coincidence, either.

 

[Darkness]

Wow - I think I really need to put more thought into things like this from now on...

 

[Black Omega]

It is quite possible to run a very dark campaign in a setting such as FR. Douglas Nile's Darkwalker trilogy is a good example of this - the minions of Kazgaroth seem unstoppable as they rack up victories and make inroads - even being insidious enough to successfully destroy the romance of the protagonists through a deliberate seduction. Keep the level of hope and triumph low and against the odds, and you give the PCs a darn good shot at heroism.

Would this be Douglas Niles? And what are the books of this trilogy. I tried looking it up but couldn't find anything on this.

Thanks.

 

[rounser]

And what are the books of this trilogy. I tried looking it up but couldn't find anything on this.

It's more commonly known as the Moonshae trilogy (but there are now two Moonshae trilogies):

Darkwalker on Moonshae
Black Wizards
Darkwell

I think WotC released these as ESDs on their online store, but they should be easy to find in used bookstores - they were fairly popular.

 

[Zelda Themelin]

I guess I don't really understand what you mean by "social power". Can you explain that more clearly?

Uh, If I'd write better english I'd try to, now it feels like half of my meanings get lost in more simple matters. I got a feeling this would become too elobrete.


My thought on that problem -- that symbols get overused and thus lose their impact -- is that it comes from bad writing. Or DMing, whatever. The symbols, the archetypes, are ALWAYS scary. They ARE the things that scare us. If they're poorly delivered then we aren't affected and we say, "Oh, vampires aren't scary," and then BOOM! something like Alien (which can, on several levels, be seen as a vampire story, not the least of which is the sexual subtext) shows up and blows audiences away.

I agree that STARTING from archetypes and building your NPCs around them is a bad way to go -- you're very likely to end with really cartoony bad guys who are SUPPOSED to be scary but aren't. I was just observing that the bad guys in my campaign, which have been very effective at scaring my players (they get really freaked out -- it's very gratifying), all relate to mythic tropes that permeate our culture and history. I didn't plan it that way, but I don't think it's a coincidence, either. [/QUOTE]

Mmh, you make IMO few really good points here.

But sometimes, it really comes down to that 'too much the same thing', no matter how well written or presented. It's a bit like with favourite food, there comes a point when you just have to eat something else.

For example in Creature Collection 1 by Sword & Sorcery there are creatures called Unhallowed. For me they were scary and I could imagine few situations, where I woudn't want be with such creature around.

Then there was template/creature called Bloodless in CC2. None of my RL gaming friends who read about that monster thought it was good idea to use, or even scary. It just lacked something that feeds imagination and scares, though it had a lot of elements. Maybe that's just it, it had too many of them. Checked, it still makes me go 'yawn', maybe it's partially that 'Poison Elves'-style picture.

Ok, any imaginative dm, who gets good ideas of it, could use such monster well.

Many people in net have liked the monster, however.

Your npc's sound really interesting, exepct for Yuek Man Chong, but that is probably her personality strikes out to me as universal female enemy stereotype of certain long-term dm of mine. If not for that, she seems nastily effective.

I have certain symbol-thing I use all the time; colors. Eye color, hair color and clothes' color for npc:s as most common. My color symbology is not picked from any book, so it derivates from popular 'icons', but it also has some similarities. I don't always do that on purpose, so somebody who is familiar with my style, has tendercy to guess things about npc or their potential part in later part of campaing. I wonder how common habit this is.

 

[Pielorinho]

Awhile ago, on realizing who was behind the nefarious goings-on in the city, one of my players commented, "Yay. More cultists."

So I'm gonna move away from cultists for a bit. Even though cultists scare me something awful.

Lately I'm fascinated by people doing terrible things in pursuit of lofty goals -- maybe it's just current events seeping into my brain.

My cultists have had two major goals so far (at least, that the PCs know about): restoring the Old Order of Society, and achieving enlightenment.

In pursuit of restoring the old, moral order of society, one cult ran an incredibly debauched nightclub (cihld prostitution drugs, and worse), murdered sailors and fed their flesh to other sailors in order to manufacture ghouls, slaughtered orcs and sold their privates as aphrodisiacs, and the like.

In pursuit of enlightenment, another cult captured some schmoe, locked him in a closet, drugged and tortured him for a month until he was insane, killed him, rendered his fat, and made candles that they could use to summon a demon of knowledge.

I don't know what archetypes this would follow, although the cannibal theme is obviously pretty strong (even the candlemaking and aphrodisiacmaking seem pretty cannibalistic, on a symbolic level). Although some archetypes may be there, they're not as important to me as is character motivation.

Of course, on another level, I do work with mythical images: I'm running a published adventure, and I substituted monkey demons for various monsters that appear in the module, downloading pictures of Indian Monkey Demon statuary as visual aids for the players. But I don't think that's what you're asking.

Not that it matters, but Camille Paglia really makes me itch.

Daniel